[Ansteorra-archery] Combat Archery - New Society Marshallate Ruling

Marlin and Amanda Stout ldcharles at sbcglobal.net
Mon Aug 11 07:12:30 PDT 2008


Eadric Anstapa wrote:
> Marlin and Amanda Stout wrote:
>> Eadric Anstapa wrote:
>>>
>> No, I'm not confusing anything. I asked for a clarification so I'm 
>> /not/ confused, since the wording wasn't, IMO, clearly written. 
>
> Charles,  I read it over again  and I get your point and I think I 
> understand where the confusion came in.
>
> Down in the explanation section it says:
>
>     "/At Pennsic in the Town Battle on Wednesday, there were 4
>     incidents of foam/tape penetrating helms that were reported.  Yes,
>     4 in one battle.  Two of them resulted in minor injury.  One was a
>     busted blood vessel in an eye, the other resulted in a bruise
>     (black eye).  All of these penetrations happened to be
>     _UHMW/RubberStopper style ammo_.  In one case, the rubber stopper
>     itself had penetrated a bit./"
>
>
> What exactly is  "UHMW/RubberStopper style ammo"?
>
> There is no such thing.  That statement could certainly cause some 
> confusion.  It is _not _legal for rubber stoppers to be used as the 
> padding on the front of UHMW cored blunts.  That paragraph does indeed 
> read as if some sort of experimental or illegal ammo was being used  
> and that the whole combat archery  populace is paying for that mistake.
>
> I have spoken with the Society CA Marshal and he has confirmed for me 
> that was a typo on his part.  That should have read        /All of 
> these penetrations happened to be _*Siloflex/RubberStopper* style 
> ammo_./  Or in other words normal Omarad style blunts.
>
> Regards,
>
> -EA

Exactly what I was concerned about. Very unclear as originally written. 
So, my next question is, why are we changing all ammo when only one type 
has the problem? Is this a proactive change, just in case UHMW ammo 
develops the same problem?

I can easily understand making an 'all ammo' change at the War, to make 
sure the problem is addressed on the spot, when there's no time for 
detailed examination. But, if what we're seeing is a problem with 
siloflex/rubber ammo, why are we changing the types that /don't/ have 
the problem?

Again, rules is rules and I'll deal with whatever they are. I'm just 
curious what the Marshalate's thinking is on the issue.

Charles
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ansteorra.org/pipermail/ansteorra-archery-ansteorra.org/attachments/20080811/1c269f7d/attachment-0003.htm>


More information about the Ansteorra-archery mailing list